You are God looking for God with God's eyes that's what you are.
I have been reading that most physists now know that the universe is non-local.
The principle of uncertainty found in Quantum machanics and the debates between Niels Borh and the Einstien EPR camp. Then comes John Bell who proves Eienstien wrong even though he was a supporter. They say that John Bells theorem alongwith test that were conducted in the 80's and especially in 1997 prove the universe is not what we see it to be in time.
Here's a C&P about John Bell
However, it was John Bell who investigated quantum theory in the greatest depth and established what the theory can tell us about the fundamental nature of the physical world.
Moreover, by stimulating experimental tests of the deepest and most profound aspects of quantum theory, Bell's work led to the possibility of exploring seemingly philosophical questions, such as the nature of reality, directly through experiments.
So if the universe is non-local then it is not reality. Things are not out there in space,, and we are not out here in space either. It's all in you head.
Some interesting quotes:
"I think it is safe to say that no one understands quantum mechanics. Do not keep saying to yourself, if you can possibly avoid it, ' But how can it be like that?' because you will go 'down the drain' into a blind alley from which nobody has yet escaped. Nobody knows how it can be like that." Richard Feynman
"What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning." Werner Heisenberg
I read some of the linked article. He certainly sounds like a solidly intelligent fellow. I will try to read the rest when it is not so late in the evening.
Here a quote from the above article:
After the inequality
A large number of Bell inequality experiments have been performed over the last 30 years or so, the most famous being those of Alain Aspect and co-workers at Orsay. In these experiments, pairs of photons are emitted in a cascade from an excited atomic state and their polarizations are measured along different axes. More recent experiments have used pairs of entangled photons emitted by nonlinear optical crystals. In these experiments the polarization of the photon plays the role of the spin in the EPR-Bohm-Bell set-up.
However, the low efficiency of the detectors used in the experiments means that additional assumptions (essentially that those photons detected are a fair sample of the total flux) have to be made to test the Bell inequality. If these assumptions are made, the results are found to rule out local realist theories, and to be in good agreement with the quantum predictions. Most physicists now accept that quantum theory is correct, and that local realism has to be abandoned.
However, other physicists, often known as the realists, strongly disagree. They question the additional assumptions in the experiments and insist on the "detection loophole" being taken seriously (see Selleri in further reading). Particles are easier to detect than photons and it will be possible to close the detection loophole with measurements of the kaons produced in f -meson decays. Such experiments are planned for the " f -factory" that was opened in Frascati, Italy, last year.
Bell himself was worried that, according to special relativity, the nonlocal (faster than light) influence demonstrated in the Aspect experiment could involve propagation backward in time in other inertial reference frames of equal status. What he called the "cheapest resolution" to this problem was to return to the Lorentz (i.e. pre-Einstein) approach to relativity in which an ether is retained. In other words, there is a preferred frame of reference in which a real causal sequence may be defined (see Bell's contribution to The Ghost in the Atom in further reading). Propagation backward in time in other frames may then be dismissed as "unreal" or "apparent". More generally, however, Bell hoped for better theories than the ones we have now, and insisted that our current version of quantum theory was no more than a temporary expedient.
Most physicists now accept that quantum theory is correct, and that local realism has to be abandoned.
So this must be why people say "are you local?" like someone is crazy..
This point is made pretty well in the movie (documentary format, but not really documentary) circulating right now in the local art houses, "What the #&*(bleep) Do We Know". We may have to revise our definitions of what "reality" is. Mystics have long testified that we are dreaming that we are actually here. Our Hindu bretheren refer to this experience on earth as "maya" (illusion).
The Non-Local Universe: The New
Physics and Matters of the Mind by Robert Nadeau and Menas Kafatos
New York: Oxford University Press, 1999
I borrowed this book from the sunnyvale ca. library very interesting. here a c&p about it:
Classical physics states that physical reality is local -- a point in space cannot influence another point beyond a relatively short distance. However, 1997, experiments were conducted in which light particles (photons) originated under certain conditions and traveled in opposite directions to detectors located about seven miles apart. The amazing results indicated that the photons "interacted" or "communicated" with one another instantly, or "in no time." Since a distance of seven miles is quite vast in quantum physics, this led physicists to an extraordinary conclusion -- even if experiments could somehow be conducted in which the distance between the detectors was halfway across the known universe, the results would indicate that interaction or communication between the photons would be instantaneous. What was revealed in these little-known experiments in 1997 was that physical reality is non-local -- a discovery that Robert Nadeau and Menas Kafatos view as "the most momentous in the history of science."
In The Non-Local Universe, Nadeau and Kafatos offer a revolutionary look at the breathtaking implications of nonlocality. They argue that since every particle in the universe has been "entangled" with other particles like the two photons in the 1997 experiments, physical reality on the most basic level is an undivided wholeness. In addition to demonstrating that physical processes are vastly interdependent and interactive, they also show that more complex systems in both physics and biology display emergent properties and/or behaviors that cannot be explained in terms of the sum of the parts. One of the most startling implications of nonlocality in human terms, claim the authors, is that there is no longer any basis for believing in the stark division between mind and world that has preoccupied much of western thought since the seventeenth century. And they also make a convincing case that human consciousness can now be viewed as emergent from, and seamlessly connected with, the entire cosmos.
In pursuing this groundbreaking argument, the authors provide a fascinating history of developments that led to the discovery of nonlocality and the sometimes heated debates among the great scientists responsible for these discoveries. They also argue that advanced in scientific knowledge have further eroded the boundaries between physics and biology, and that recent studies on the evolution of the human brain suggest that the logical foundations of mathematics and ordinary language are much more similar than we previously imagined. What this new knowledge reveals, the authors conclude, is that the connection between mind and nature is far more intimate than we previously dared to imagine. What they offer is a revolutionary look at the implications of nonlocality, implications that reach deep into that most intimate aspect of humanity -- consciousness.
Robert Nadeau, a historian of science, has written seven books on the implications of advances in science and technology. Menas Kafatos, a physicist, has published numerous books and articles on computational science, astrophysics, earth systems science, general relativity, and the foundations of quantum theory. They are both professors at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia.
The title of this thread is: You are God looking for God with God's eyes that's what you are. Does not reflect a belief of mine, I merely felt it intuitively at the time. I may have picked it up from Miester Eckhart,, for I remember some of his mystical writtings and I seem to recall him saying it in his writtings.
I must surrender to the idea that to know this is impossible one can only speculate.
Why surrender to any kind of idea? No this isn't just a matter of semantics, why should you limit yourself to any idea? Take a step back from the fragmentation of thought, it's not about a thought being right or wrong, that doesn't apply. Most people are so caught up in thought that they don't recognize that stillness abiding as mind, only the contents of mind.
I guess surrender is not the right word, accept would have been a better choice,, or be content with,, or just let that be.